Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Log in

Register

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. You'll receive an email shortly with a link to create a new password. If you have trouble finding this email, please check your spam folder.

Joseph S. Nye, Jr., a former US assistant secretary of defense and chairman of the US National Intelligence Council, is University Professor at Harvard University. He is the author of
Is the American Century Over?

Russia's decline is truly a tragedy. If a liberal, outwarding leadership had developed, the country could have been in a position to take a leading role on the world stage. Putin keeps on going on about the importance of Russia but it is his policies that are causing it to shrink and become irrelevant.
On male life expectancies: there has been a turnaround in the last decade. Once only 59, they have now risen to 66. The accuracy of the statistics is questonable but it is likely that there has been some improvement.
Mr Nye didn't explore the role of minorities sufficiently. Russia has 21 recognized minorities and they comprise 20% of the population. They are not Orthodox, they speak Russian as a second language (if at all) and there are significant, violent, independence movements. Today's Russia should be seen as the last European Empire. Like all the other European empires its time has passed and it will shrink. How it manages that decline will determine the level of violence and the future of those left in what remains of today's Russia. At the moment the omens are not good. Putin and his supporters are living in a dream world where Moscow is still has some sort of equivalence to Washington. That delusion will create many problems for eastern Europeans, central Asians and, not least, the Russians themselves.

You completely ignore the fact that Bush promised we would not push NATO to Russia's borders and that we helped to finance the overthrow of a legitimate government in Ukraine. If Russia ever did anything similar, we' be going ballistic. But wait, they did in Cuba once and we went ballistic.

What is happening in Ukraine currently cannot be entirely put down to Russian aggression.I refer to the recent murders of 8 journalists and others who supported former President Janukovich attributed to the revived Ukrainian neo-Nazi brigade which during the Second World War was responsible for great cruelties including in Poland.This continuing murderous spree has apparently been condoned by the Poroschenko government in Kiev.This is not simply Russian aggression.What is seen is the split between east and west Ukraine,exacerbated by the interference of the EU Baroness Ashton and US Senator McCain and their supporters who pursued regime change, thinking to expand EU/NATO boundaries.Like other recent regime change events, in Georgia,Libya,Afghanistan and Iraq, where outside western interests tried to dictate the governance in areas of mixed ethnic,linguistic,religious and cultural origins by disturbing a delicate political balance, the Ukrainian situation has ended in tears-not for the EU or the USA,or even Russia, but for the unfortunate people of Ukraine.
The most likely outcome for future peace would be for Ukraine to split back along the lines that it was historically.
Currently only 3 members of NATO want to commit to 2 percent of their budget on defence, the USA government wants defence cutbacks, and the EU is in financial disarray over Greece.Everyone has been printing money, and none has the appetite or ability to undertake the huge investment required to reconstruct a bankrupt Ukraine,which is run by an unstable government dominated by corrupt oligarchs with private armies fighting over the territory.Blaming Russia for all this mess,when 25 years have passed since the downfall of the USSR during which time Ukrainian governments consistently refused economic reform and financial probity and continued to sink in a morass of corruption, is somewhat unreal.Russia only became directly involved when its naval base at Sevastopol was seen by Putin as under threat with Senator McCain et al suggesting Ukraine would join NATO so,de facto the US fleet could occupy Sevastopol-breaching all agreements made at the collapse of the former Soviet Union re NATO expansion.
Russian sanctions are proving a Pyrrhic victory,not only for EU trading partners, but even for US technological trade.Russia is the only country in Europe with the resources to be self sufficient.Challenging Putin,instead of trying to reach a modus vivendi could cause an even worse situation.Behind Putin Is Shoygu, and he could be another order of magnitude of difficulty to try and deal with.
In summary;it is time to abandon regime change and its'democratic'policies and get real. Getting the world's finances in order, tackling corruption and re-establishing trade is the only practical route to progress.

Any long term reader of foreign affairs/IR in general knows that Nye has one qualification - being wrong. Actually 2: being wrong, but being wrong ideologically. We could ask Nye to counterfactualise a scenario where Russia has taken over Baja California. We could ask him if he's seen a map of NATO missile emplacements; We could ask him if the US/EU’s major issue is that Russia, contrary to his erroneous assertions, has plenty of geostrategic power in the form of oil and gas, and that the US (EU/NATO) are particularly unhappy that Russia can trade with China, can break from the US world economic order, is no longer doing as it was told for Western investors in the neoliberal heyday of the oligarchical 1990s; is exercising a foreign policy that is benign by Western standards, having not destroyed Ukraine, but rather acted to protect an area of the country ethnically Russian, the Sevastopol base, and has been highly restrained given that the US instigated this to try and further provoke Russia by undertaking a coup hoping for a quick pro-NATO, EU client state. Nye notes in passing at the end of his mess of error and lies "economic sanctions" - these, of course, at international acts of war. And still the US must resort to the sorts of Colin Powell photo-shopping evidence to show that Russia is doing anything other than defence, and defending a region of the Ukraine that a referendum would probably opt out of the collapsing wannabe-Western client state with a fascist government. But I urge anyone who takes Nye's piece seriously to find a map of NATO bases and missile facilities and mentally transpose those to Mexico and Canada. Indeed here's a news article that didn't make the IHT (http://www.projectcensored.org/pentagon-and-nato-encircle-russia-and-china/), and those bases ( http://socioecohistory.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/russia_wants_war_look_how_closely_they_put_country_to_our_military_bases.jpg).

Nice oratory, too bad it is wholly false. The US did not "take over" the Ukraine. The majority of the Ukrainian people wanted to join the EU....NOT the United States. Nor, for that matter NATO, although , due to Russian atrocities, that may come about as well as the Russians have lost the goodwill of at least one full generation of Ukrainians. Too bad the Russians would not allow the natural evolution of a close people. They would have benefited mightily in the long run

Sorry for my bad english.
"Russian officers, he reported, directly command large military operations in eastern Ukraine, including the siege and capture of the important transport center of Debaltseve in February. "(c)
I don't support Putin.
But I want to be objective.
Russian word "Russian" in Russian language has two meaning.
1. The citizen of the Russian Federation.
2. Nationality. I will explain. Russian can live in the post-Soviet states, but they have never been citizens of the Russian Federation.
I mean ethnic community.

Though sanctions are unlikely to change Crimea’s status or lead to withdrawal of Russian soldiers from Ukraine.."
Dear Joseph, show evidence of the presence of Russian soldiers, photo or video! Or the western "free" press to anything to provide evidence of his words? You're lying!
I live in Russia, and was born in Russia and I do not see the decline of the country, under Putin, Russia has become even more blatantly lying to you, and the Americans, who were not in Russia believe you!

I suspect the decline in recent standards of living has become evident to Russians, as the international value of their currency has collapsed. To state there is no decline, when Russians can not buy nearly the level of such goods as cars, computers cell phones and the like without paying 40-80% more, or have them be wholly unavailable, is to deny the obvious, since Russia, being a resource driven/military dominatedeconomy simply can not produce world class consumer goods

European posturing - esp German - seems different from the Americans. Geography perhaps defining strategy. But natural therefore not to isolate Russia. European boundaries perhaps best protected with Russia inside the European Union - as many within perhaps have been advocating. Pertinent perhaps to recall Gorbachev pining for a Common European Home for Russia when USSR meltdown happened in 1989. The choice when faced with alternatives such as these is never not to leave a caged Lion an exit route perhaps. There never is a permanent enemy or friend - at least if history is any guide.

Why do westerners always underestimate their opponents? Russia has been saddled with the problems of a petro-state - including an over-valued exchange rate - but has resources that go far beyond oil and gas. In any case, a strategy that constrains "Putin," but engages "Russia" is just word play. Until Russians reject Putin, the West will have to deal with him, and will have to choose between confrontation and engagement.

I don't think Nye is underestimating his "opponent" at all. Russia, demographically is in long term decline. In addition, that part of the population that is growing, the Muslims, aren't "Russian" ethnically or religiously. Their obedience to Moscow, like that of the current Chechen warlord is tactical, not driven by a desire to be Russian.
Unfortunately, Russia's move to confrontation has sped up the decline. For example, even Luko's Chairman stated, the embargo on Western oil drilling technology, specifically US technology CAN NOT be replaced by Russian, Chinese or any other technology...it definitely meant that output on the old Russian wells will be dropping for multiple years, and new fields cant be adequately explored. Argue with him if you like...but don't you think he knows better?

1. Only Vlad Putin could order the Russian military to stop supporting the breakaway regions of the Donbass.

2. Only Vlad Putin could lower the nationalist tone that is extant among Russians.

3. Only Vlad Putin could stop the Russian Air Force overflights of Western nations.

But why would he?

I can't think of a single reason that he would want to do any of those things.

Because we haven't given him a reason to want to do any of those things. That's why he hasn't ordered those things be done.

Neither threats (bad, never works with Russian folks anyway) nor sanctions (good, but they take time to produce limited success) have convinced Vlad Putin to do the things we want him to do.

No, we're simply not giving Vlad the reasons that will work to make him want to change 1, 2, or 3, above.

Every day, every one of us -- and that goes for countries too -- are teaching others how to treat us.

We are teaching Vlad Putin how to treat us by our actions and our statements.

And we see the results every day.

When at long last, we arrive at the place where we teach other world leaders that it is always in their best interests and a positive thing to do as we suggest, or ask, then we will get what we want. Only then.

In human nature, really, it comes down to 'carrot and stick' -- and here in the West, we are very accomplished at 'stick' while our 'carrot' skills are woefully undeveloped from under-utilization.

"Diplomacy means getting the other side to do what you want them to do, and making them think it was all their idea in the first place."

(...And not at gunpoint. Did I really have to say it?)

That in one statement, is where the West is weak. It's the missing link that we need to work on.

Always a pleasure to read your fine essays, Joseph! Thanks for posting them at ProSyn.

Thank you for your comment. I'll ignore the Iran portion of your comments in order to be brief...

"difficult to figure out what you think we should have done."

1. Stay out of it! Ukraine is not our hemisphere, therefore it's not our problem. At best, it is: a) a Ukrainian problem b) a Russian problem c) a Black Sea nation problem and [arguably] d) a European problem.

1a. Especially in the case of Crimea, where 97.1% of the population voted to rejoin Russia, it is none of our business to tell people how to vote.
1b. And in the eastern Ukraine (a place I visited in the late 1980's) it has always been a no-man's land, and I encountered many non-Ukrainian Army 'checkpoints' where they want to find out who you are, and why you're there, and where you're going. [i.e. no sign anywhere of any Ukrainian government/police/Army]

It is a place that hasn't been a functioning part of Ukraine since before the end of the Cold War. [i.e. it's not really a part of Ukraine, the locals have run it themselves since then]

If the people of the Donbass region are tired of alternately getting ignored by the Ukrainian government for long periods of time, and then shelled by the Ukrainian Army for long periods of time, I don't blame them in the least for wanting to breakaway from Ukraine. Whether they then join with Russia should be up to them.

2. Ukraine is not an economically viable unit. Few people know this.

In fact, this was done by the Soviets so that any power that attempted to take over Ukraine would spend so much on it, they would be forced (by economics) to give it up.

The entire power grid and transportation system was designed by Soviet agencies to be as costly as possible operate, for that reason. The forced labour and the huge subsidies that the USSR government sent to float Ukraine totalled more than all the other subsidies sent to all other USSR states/jurisdictions combined.

If Europe were to swallow whole, all of Ukraine, the combined economic problems of Greece, Italy, Spain, and Portugal would pale by comparison.

Through no fault of Ukrainians, it is not possible to operate it as a viable country without massive subsidies of a type never before seen in the Western world.

2a. ERGO, the country must be split up in order to viably function. This will happen, it must happen. The world cannot simply stand by and watch the good people of Ukraine sink lower every year/decade.

If the people in the West of Ukraine (including Kiev) want to join the EU, fine, let's help make that happen.

If the people in the east want to rejoin Russia fine! Let's stop playing politics because some people have a 'hate-on' for Vlad Putin.

3. "For the West, the demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one." -- Henry Kissinger http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html

However Vlad Putin wants to run Russia, it is not our business. Russians are not simply 'Westerners that speak Russian' they are a very distinct nationality -- a very different people.

Trying to view Russian people through the prism of the American experience is folly. They are not us. I've been all across the USSR back in the day, and have been in Russia after the Cold War ended, and I can tell you that they are a good-natured, very hardy, nationalistic and proud people.

They're NOT the kind of people that we want as enemies. And they remember slights against them for decades. The Russian's call this character trait as having 'long teeth'.

There will never be any successful Western-led democratic uprising to overthrow the then-existing government, to install a more democratic Western-friendly regime. If anyone tells you different, it is complete BS.

And trying to view Russian people through a European prism is even worse. If you know your history, you know this to be true.

4. I do agree with you with regards to 'soft power' which should always be the method of first resort, while military power should always be used as a last resort.

I also agree with President Obama when he said; "Just because we have the biggest hammer, doesn't mean that every problem is a nail."

Both sides could have engaged in more soft power and less sabre-rattling.

The Americans have much bigger fish to fry than Ukraine -- now that the pivot to Asia is underway. That must be the top priority of American policymakers for the next 10 years. There are trillions of dollars to be made in the Pacific rim nations and we are 15 years behind schedule on setting up that paradigm.

The Europeans have better things to do than get stuck subsidizing Ukraine to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars per year, for the next 20 years until the entire electricity grid can be rebuilt and the transportation system can be brought up to 21st century standards.

And both the Americans and Europeans must rein in some of their people who are still now, in the year 2015(!) trying to fulfill their dream of completely encircling the USSR (a country that doesn't exist any more) and then finishing it off in a glorious display of 'fireworks' while singing a rousing rendition of the theme from 'Rocky' IV'

As for Russia; I commend Vlad Putin for his gentle hand with Crimea and I hope that a referendum for the breakaway provinces of Ukraine to join Russia similar to the Crimean referendum is part of the plan.

Whether Russian troops are actually fighting in eastern Ukraine or not, nobody has offered any proof. Yes, lots of accusations and a few tabloid style articles. But not anything that I could accept as proof positive.

Good on critiquing Western approaches (totally absent on critiquing Russian use of force though since they are doing EVERYTHING you accuse the West of doing).

difficult to figure out what you think we should have done. The Ukrainians wanted out of a corrupt system, similar to the way Russia is run today. They demonstrated, with remarkable courage, against this. Should the EU and the US ignore this? Well what happened when we ignored the so called "Green Revolution" in Iran when clearly the majority of Iranians wanted to throw off the tyranny of the mullahs? These people were shot, forcibly dispersed and a false election result stood. Now Iran is on the verge of building a bomb.
Perhaps, the West in general could have been more forthcoming after the Cold War ended, true, but the West didn't cause the incredible corruption in Russia today, the West didn't pick Putin, Yeltsin did, the West hasn't told Putin to dismiss the economic reformers and bring in thieves and siloviki from Leningrad to run the Country, Putin did. And finally, the West didn't tell Putin to basically destroy its "soft power", the power to lead by example, in Eastern Europe...that is on Putin and his cynical use of "hybrid war"

the Soviet Union was never totally isolated, neither will be Russia. She just has to be recognized for what she is: a hostile country with aggressive neo-colonial governing philosophy, ruled now by a gang of thieves . You can trade with such a country, you can strike arms control agreements. You just cannot have normal relations and you absolutely need to build military defenses against it.
Russia will reform, or she will come apart. Very little that the rest of the world can do about either. The only vested interest the world really has is to make sure that anyone who comes into a possession of her nukes is absolutely certain of facing devastating retaliation in case of first use. While it is true that Russia can incinerate the world, the world can incinerate Russia as well.

Nye believes the "long-term decline" that Russia faces would not leave us unaffected, posing "a very real threat to the international order in Europe and beyond", potentially making this country "even more dangerous". The Russian writer, Mikhail Shishkin once said the invasion of Ukraine had created a "black hole" that could suck in the whole of Europe.
Indeed, despite diplomatic efforts to enforce a ceasefire and debates in Europe whether to tighten sanctions on Russia, the Kremlin continues to play a "decisive role" in eastern Ukraine, not only pitting pro-Russian rebels against government troops, but also by deploying Russian troops and commanding "large military operations".
According to Nye more sanctions and isolation would hardly impress Putin and change his "revisionist behavior". Not only has Russia the world's largest nuclear arsenal, that could "destroy the US", it is a huge country with "vast natural resources", with a skilled and "educated population". What is alarming is that "as its economic and geopolitical influence has waned", it sees its nuclear stockpile as a deterrent, a strategy of last resort. In recent months Russian military had wilfully violated the airspace and territorial waters of other European countries.
Putin is seen by Shishkin as a "very lonely ageing man", terrified of losing power and suffering the same fate as Saddam Hussein or Muhammad Gaddafi. The incarceration of Egypt's Muhamed Morsi or the flight of his last stooge in Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych spooks him. This ushered in an "instinct of self-preservation" and the "formula" that many dictators had known: "create an enemy; start a war". That the state of war proves to be Putin's elixir of life, was the annexation of Crimea, which made him hugely popular at home. He has garnered much support for the intervention in eastern Ukraine, with the help of state-controlled propaganda.
While it's important to punish Russia for its aggression, it's equally important not to exclude it in issues that the international community has to grapple with - "nuclear security and non-proliferation, terrorism, space, the Artic, and Iran and Afghanistan" etc. Despite frosty relationship, no one would want to start "a new Cold War". The strategy momentarily is to "maintain sanctions, help bolster Ukraine’s economy, and continue to strengthen NATO", something that would agonise Putin. Meanwhile the world just hopes for a miracle - Putin's change of heart, a resignation, an untimely death or even a palace coup!

Well written..especially the part about agonizing Putin by strengthening NATO. Clearly, in a non threatening way, the military budgets of Germany, France and all the other NATO countries need to follow the lead of Poland and the Baltic countries and expand their military...they don't need to talk about it...just do it...

Decline and fall of Roman empire was not only implicit in its rule but also its suzerainty across the Mediterranean Sea.
May be the author should have been writing about US and its hawks who're in the process of undermining their own POTUS on non-proliferation of Iranian nuclear issue.
And, btw, you've to define what you really mean by the word *decline*. Is it Russian GDP or nuclear posture?
Washington Consensus is not any longer relevant in age of multi-polarity and globalization. American decline and fall is of course under way - just listen to GOP potential candidates and their imbecile intelligence....

While there is still enough Neanderthal verbiage to meet editorial standards and uphold the establishment's ideological credibility [1], this is a welcome verbal de-escalation.

[1] for example, statements such as "As its economic and geopolitical influence has waned, so has its willingness to consider renouncing its nuclear status." - a miniature masterpiece of wordcraft, like a good martini, delicately alternating contradictory layers of anti-realism, anti-history, and anti-logic, and hypocrisy into a velvety smooth presentation of nearly pure nonsense.

Russia declining..?! Gentleman, it looks, inspite of all your qualifications, you still need to be educated on the history and will of the Russians. The decline of Russia will unfortunately trigger the end of the United States as well, if what you mean by decline is the dissolution of Russia as a nation state.

UMMh the "History and will of the Russian people"...this sounds like some mystical thing...akin to German pre WWII writers..
The collapse of Russia, like the collapse of the Soviet Union and Tsarist Russia before it, will likely not destroy the USA. Why should it?
Do you think the Russian Generals's in their last bunker are going to press the button knowing that their children and grandchildren will be annihilated if they do so?
Why? the "destruction of Russia" is a gradual thing, not accomplished by invasion, but by internal corruption, "election" of a leader that suppresses free speech and drives out many innovators while putting money into unproductive military rather than diversifying the economy, demographic collapse, and an increase in non Russians who are part of Russia only for economic reasons but are Muslim and Turkish by nationality.

The collapse you talk about will occur, but it will not come about by invasion, nor will it inevitably result in people dying...more akin to the collapse of the British Empire post WWII. as colony after colony secede and its people lost the will to be hegemons of the world.
That is inevitable for Russia as its population shrinks and in comparison with the economic might of the US,China and even Germany and Japan, and the growth of India.
Thar is seemingly inevitable..not a cause for Gotterdamerung